Joystiqhttp://www.joystiq.com
Joystiqhttp://www.blogsmithmedia.com/http://www.joystiq.com/media/feedlogo.gifJoystiqhttp://www.joystiq.com
en-usCopyright 2015 AOL, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.joystiq.com/2014/11/05/eff-petitions-us-government-to-resurrect-abandoned-games/http://www.joystiq.com/2014/11/05/eff-petitions-us-government-to-resurrect-abandoned-games/http://www.joystiq.com/2014/11/05/eff-petitions-us-government-to-resurrect-abandoned-games/#comments
The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a petition to the Library of Congress and the United States Copyright Office this week over the modification of abandoned games, particularly those that require an online connection to prevent piracy. The EFF is seeking a change to current laws that would deem mods that strip out authentication checks as fair use of the software after developers take those servers offline.

The foundation noted Civilization 5 and Mario Kart Wii as examples in its petition, though the list of eligible abandoned games goes back many years. Should the Library of Congress approve the request, legally-acquired copies of many of those games would be open to modification so players can enjoy them on third-party servers. The petition does note that MMOs and "persistent world" games would be exempt from the change, as their "audiovisual content is primarily stored on the developer's server and not in the client."

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>abandonedAbandonWarecopyrightcopyright-infringementcopyright-lawDRMeffelectronic-frontier-foundationfair-uselawlibrary-of-congresspetitionus-copyright-officeWed, 05 Nov 2014 10:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/10/08/square-enix-sues-snk-over-past-copyright-infringement-allegation/http://www.joystiq.com/2014/10/08/square-enix-sues-snk-over-past-copyright-infringement-allegation/http://www.joystiq.com/2014/10/08/square-enix-sues-snk-over-past-copyright-infringement-allegation/#comments
Square Enix announced that it brought a declaratory judgment suit against SNK Playmore as a response to previous accusations of copyright infringement. SNK sued Square Enix in May, claiming the Final Fantasy publisher used copyrighted SNK characters without permission in the High Score Girl manga. SNK alleged that characters from The King of Fighters and Samurai Shodown were used more than 100 times without permission.

Following the lawsuit, police collected evidence in early August from Square Enix's offices, and the publisher stated it "has been cooperating fully with police investigations since the domiciliary search, and will continuously maintain the cooperative stance with good faith." Square Enix is now seeking an authoritative opinion from the Osaka District Court to determine that it has not infringed on SNK's copyright and will "prove the point through civil procedures."

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>copyrightcopyright-infringementdeclaratory-judgementhigh-score-girllawsuitmangasamurai-shodownsnksnk-playmoreSquare-Enixthe-king-of-fightersWed, 08 Oct 2014 11:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/06/27/monsters-ate-my-birthday-cake-accused-of-stealing-another-artist/http://www.joystiq.com/2014/06/27/monsters-ate-my-birthday-cake-accused-of-stealing-another-artist/http://www.joystiq.com/2014/06/27/monsters-ate-my-birthday-cake-accused-of-stealing-another-artist/#commentsMonsters Ate My Birthday Cake has been accused of copying its map artwork from another artist, Athens, Greece-based Ilias Sounas. The illustrator posted a blog comparing art they completed in 2012 for Karios Games' MonsterUp Adventures to that of SleepNinja's game, which was funded on Kickstarter to the tune of $26,096 in February 2013 and just launched this week on iOS and Android.

"My dispute is over the game map, not the mechanics and overall style, which is identical to the world I had created for MonsterUp Adventures," Sounas told Joystiq. The blog compares the two games' monsters and overworlds, each being an island with markedly similar features such as trees, hills and shadows. Sounas began uploading his creations for the game to the Dribbble design community site in April 2012 as well as the Behance portfolio site in July 2012. Sounas said he contacted both SleepNinja and publisher Cartoon Network regarding the allegations and "their replies are pending." Likewise, Cartoon Network replied to an inquiry from Joystiq, noting the publisher is "looking into this" and "will be in touch with a response."

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>allegationsandroidcartoon-networkcopycopyrightcopyright-infringementilias-sounasiosipadiphonekickstartermapmobilemonsters-ate-my-birthday-cakeoverworldpcplagiarismsleepninjasounas-designFri, 27 Jun 2014 11:00:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2012/11/17/tattoo-artist-sues-thq-over-use-of-original-ink-in-ufc-undispute/http://www.joystiq.com/2012/11/17/tattoo-artist-sues-thq-over-use-of-original-ink-in-ufc-undispute/http://www.joystiq.com/2012/11/17/tattoo-artist-sues-thq-over-use-of-original-ink-in-ufc-undispute/#commentsA tattoo artist by the name of Chris Escobedo has filed a lawsuit against THQ over its supposedly unauthorized usage of a tattoo Escobedo designed. Specifically, Escobedo owns the copyright to a tattoo present on the virtual version of MMA fighter Carlos Condit in UFC Undisputed 2010 and UFC Undisputed 3.

Escobedo's argument hinges on the idea that, despite being permanently affixed to a public figure, the tattoo's design still belongs to him, as he created it originally and never signed the rights to the design away to Condit. By digitally recreating that design without permission, THQ may have violated Escobedo's copyright on the work. The lawsuit also claims that THQ's usage of Condit's likeness on its website violates Escobedo's copyright as well.

The lawsuit seeks compensation for "actual damages" caused by THQ's usage of the artwork, as well as "an order directing THQ to account to Mr. Escobedo for all gains, profits and advantages derived by them by their wrongful conduct, and to disgorge all profits obtained by their wrongful conduct." Gross.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>Carlos-ConditChris-Escobedocopyright-infringementCopyrightInfringementlawlawsuitlegallion-tattoomicrosoftplaystationps3tattoothe-lion-tattooTHQufc-undisputed-3xboxYukesSat, 17 Nov 2012 18:00:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/31/ubisoft-on-offense-in-novelist-lawsuit-files-to-throw-out-claim/http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/31/ubisoft-on-offense-in-novelist-lawsuit-files-to-throw-out-claim/http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/31/ubisoft-on-offense-in-novelist-lawsuit-files-to-throw-out-claim/#commentsUbisoft has filed a complaint to prevent novelist John Beiswenger from renewing his claims that the Assassin's Creed universe stole ideas from his novel, Link. Beiswenger first sued Ubisoft in April, but dropped the lawsuit earlier this week because he couldn't handle the expense of litigation.

Beiswenger dismissed the Ubisoft case "without prejudice," meaning he can pick up the charges and pursue litigation at any time, and Ubisoft is looking to have the case found "frivolous and without merit," Gamasutra reports.

Ubisoft's complaint argues that Beiswenger's claims of copyright infringement are based on "patently non-copyrightable elements." His claims include "assassins" and "spiritual and biblical tones."

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>assassins-creed-3copyright-infringementjohn-beiswengerlawsuitmicrosoftpcplaystationps3suedUbisoftxboxThu, 31 May 2012 19:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2012/04/18/ubisoft-gametrailers-sued-in-assassins-creed-copyright-infring/http://www.joystiq.com/2012/04/18/ubisoft-gametrailers-sued-in-assassins-creed-copyright-infring/http://www.joystiq.com/2012/04/18/ubisoft-gametrailers-sued-in-assassins-creed-copyright-infring/#commentsAmerican author John Beiswenger has filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Ubisoft and Gametrailers that claims the Assassin's Creed franchise stole core ideas from Beiswenger's novel, Link. Link was published in 2002 and the first Assassin's Creed game dropped in 2007.

Beiswenger claims the Animus in Assassin's Creed is a direct copy of his Link device, which allows users to access ancestral memories and relive specific moments in history, much as the Animus does. Beiswenger says his novel discusses "assassinations" and has "spiritual and biblical tones" also found in Assassin's Creed. And then there's the battle between good and evil that Beiswenger says Assassin's Creed stole right from the pages of Link.

Beiswenger is suing Gametrailers for the Assassin's Creed trailers that he says infringe on the same Link copyright. There are 11 counts against Ubisoft and Gametrailers in total, and only most of them made us laugh.

Beiswenger is seeking up to $5.25 million in damages and a cessation of further copyright infringement. We're pretty sure that second part is already happening, so perhaps Beiswenger will get something out of all this paperwork after all.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>animusAssassins-Creedassassins-creed-revelationscopyrightcopyright-infringementgametrailerslawsuitlinkmicrosoftnintendopcplaystationps3sueUbisoftwii-uxboxWed, 18 Apr 2012 14:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2012/03/16/whats-it-like-to-have-your-indie-game-stolen/http://www.joystiq.com/2012/03/16/whats-it-like-to-have-your-indie-game-stolen/http://www.joystiq.com/2012/03/16/whats-it-like-to-have-your-indie-game-stolen/#commentsNo journalist, friend or decent human being wants to ask that question, especially not to an 18-year-old first-time developer who recently saw success as a student finalist in IGF 2012. Unfortunately, today we asked Mattia Traverso that very thing about his game One and One Story,after the events unfolded live on his Twitter feed: Traverso alerted the community that One and One Story had been counterfieted with "THEY STOLE MY GAME" and a succession of five tweets that included seven capitalized f-bombs.

One and One Story hadn't been cloned or copied, but it was completely stolen -- code, graphics and all. The group that stole it implemented a few unused assets that were hidden in the game file, Traverso told Joystiq, and its version has completely broken animations and stretched graphics.

"It's kind of hilarious," Traverso said hours after his initial discovery. But when he first got the Google Alert and tracked down the stolen game to the App Store this morning, Traverso didn't find anything about the situation amusing.

"I panicked. I didn't know what to do, so I screamed on Twitter," he said.

His screaming didn't go unnoticed and it drew the attention of other indies, including Canabalt's Adam Saltsman. Saltsman instructed Traverso to fill out a DMCA takedown, and two hours after his discovery Traverso was able to breathe a little easier.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app-storeclonecopycopyrightcopyright-infringementDMCAigfigf-student-showcase-2012iosipadiphoneMattia-TraversoMaTXmobileOne-and-One-StorypcFri, 16 Mar 2012 21:00:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2011/07/06/senate-bill-978-not-much-of-a-danger-to-youtube-game-runthroughs/http://www.joystiq.com/2011/07/06/senate-bill-978-not-much-of-a-danger-to-youtube-game-runthroughs/http://www.joystiq.com/2011/07/06/senate-bill-978-not-much-of-a-danger-to-youtube-game-runthroughs/#comments
When we're too busy to actually play Gitaroo Man, we happily resort to watching "Let's Play" runthrough videos of Gitaroo Man. Unfortunately, an addendum to federal copyright laws currently working its way through our country's legislative channels seeks to make streaming videos of copyrighted content just as illegal as pirating films -- the penalties for which are displayed every time you start up a video. Fortunately, This is My Next has explained why this law wouldn't find much traction in stopping these kinds of nostalgic walkthroughs from being uploaded.

The statute can only be enforced in instances where uploaders are "willfully" infringing on a copyright with intent to make money, and is only punishable if said uploader makes (or the game company loses) over $2,500. That's probably not true about a vast majority of the walkthroughs on streaming video sites, meaning our vicarious Gitarooing should continue unabated.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>copyright-infringementlawlegislationpoliticssenatesenate-bill-978Wed, 06 Jul 2011 15:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2011/01/25/facebook-game-blingville-gets-cease-and-desist-from-zynga/http://www.joystiq.com/2011/01/25/facebook-game-blingville-gets-cease-and-desist-from-zynga/http://www.joystiq.com/2011/01/25/facebook-game-blingville-gets-cease-and-desist-from-zynga/#comments
There's an immense power struggle happening right now, in the deep, deep folds of the social gaming universe -- a struggle over ownership of an extremely lucrative word fragment. Zynga recently sent a cease and desist letter to Blingville LLC, the creators of an upcoming Facebook game that shares the name of their company. According to Zynga, the use of "ville" in the game and company's moniker infringes on its own collectionof social gaming trademarks.

Blingville, not a-feared of Zynga's assumedly massive litigatory army, has filed a letter to the West Virginia U.S. District Court, seeking a declaration from the court that their game doesn't actually infringe on Zynga's trademarks. The studio also hopes to have Zynga foot the bill for any legal fees potentially accrued during a legal battle. We'll keep you updated on how this turns out -- but until it gets settled, we'd suggest developers and city planners alike avoid using the suffix. (Hear that, Louisville? You're officially on notice.)

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>blingvillecease-and-desistcopyright-infringementfarmvillelawsuitpczyngaTue, 25 Jan 2011 15:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2011/01/19/world-of-starcraft-mod-zerg-rushed-by-blizzard-lawyers/http://www.joystiq.com/2011/01/19/world-of-starcraft-mod-zerg-rushed-by-blizzard-lawyers/http://www.joystiq.com/2011/01/19/world-of-starcraft-mod-zerg-rushed-by-blizzard-lawyers/#comments
Apparently, that crack we made about Blizzard's mighty cease-and-desist hammer in yesterday's post about the World of StarCraft mod project (which uses StarCraft 2 tools to attempt to create a standalone MMO) was a tad prophetic. Though the developer hasn't actually slapped the team with the dreaded C&D (yet), it did petition YouTube to have the mod's demo videos removed, citing a copyright violation.

It's unclear what further action Blizzard will take, but it would be irresponsible to assume that its actions are indicative of the existence of a real World of StarCraft game. It's entirely possible that the company simply wants to protect its "StarCraft" name, or reserve the title for possible future use -- though it would be a shame if their squatting ended up shutting down these modders' impressive efforts. Especially after they asked so nicely for permission.

If you thought that being perma-banned from the Battle.net servers was the most dire repercussion of cheating while playing StarCraft 2, you're sorely mistaken. Last week, Blizzard filed a lawsuit in the Los Angeles U.S. District Court against three players who allegedly created and sold StarCraft 2 hacks -- which we assume are responsible for a large portion of the 5,000 bans that were handed down earlier this month.

According to Blizzard's complaints, folks who use the hacks created by the trio actually engage in copyright infringement, using the game "in excess of the scope of their limited license, as set forth in the EULA and ToU." Blizzard also claims that these hacks "cause serious harm to the value of StarCraft II," by decreasing the game's legitimate players' capacity "to enjoy and participate in the competitive online experience."

It's unclear how much compensation Blizzard is seeking in the case, though a similar lawsuit filed in 2008 against a hacker who created an AI leveling bot in World of Warcraft netted the developer over $6 million in damages. We've contacted Blizzard for further comment on the lawsuit.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>blizzardcheatingcopyright-infringementhacklawsuitlegalpcStarcraft-2Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2010/04/16/activision-fails-to-have-no-doubt-lawsuit-dismissed/http://www.joystiq.com/2010/04/16/activision-fails-to-have-no-doubt-lawsuit-dismissed/http://www.joystiq.com/2010/04/16/activision-fails-to-have-no-doubt-lawsuit-dismissed/#comments
If the whole West, Zampella and Activision kerfluffle is no longer satisfying your desire for daily litigation drama, we'd like to point you to an old friend we haven't heard from in a while. We speak, of course, of the No Doubt vs. Activision lawsuit, in which the former accused the latter of infringing on its right-of-publicity by allowing their in-game Band Hero avatars to be used to sing other recording artists' songs in the game.

According to the LA Times, Activision recently attempted to invoke freedom-of-speech protections under the 1st Amendment to have the case dismissed out-of-hand -- a tactic shot down by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Kenji Machida. Though Activision has the option to appeal this decision, it looks like the folks from No Doubt might have a chance at taking back their intellectual property and forming a new studio under EA. Wait -- we mixed them up again, didn't we?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>activisionBand Heroband-heroBandHerocopyright-infringementDSGuitar-HerolawlawsuitlegalMicrosoftneversoftNintendono-doubtRed-Octaneright-of-publicityWiiXbox-360Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:02:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/22/ea-rumors-of-lawsuit-over-south-park-episode-are-nonsense/http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/22/ea-rumors-of-lawsuit-over-south-park-episode-are-nonsense/http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/22/ea-rumors-of-lawsuit-over-south-park-episode-are-nonsense/#comments
Today, a recent post on Daily Informer was brought to our attention, which reports that EA has decided to sue over a recent South Park episode, "Sexual Healing." The episode in question shows a mock-up of Tiger Woods PGA Tour 11, mixing in some ridiculous fighting elements (involving the wife he cheated on) into the golf sim portion of the game. It's really over-the-top, akin to the show's usual satire practices.

We contacted EA to get to the bottom of this, to which an EA spokesperson commented the rumored impending lawsuit is "nonsense." So, there you have it: EA is not suing over the episode. Nothing else to see here -- move along.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>copyrightcopyright-infringementea-sportslawsuitMicrosoftsouth-parksouth-park-studiostiger-woodstiger-woods-pga-tour-11Xbox-360Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:00:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/28/jellyvision-suing-aflac-over-you-dont-know-jack-parody/http://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/28/jellyvision-suing-aflac-over-you-dont-know-jack-parody/http://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/28/jellyvision-suing-aflac-over-you-dont-know-jack-parody/#comments
Now, see, we were pretty certain that nobody was still working for Jellyvision -- however, we wouldn't be willing to risk a pricey copyright infringement suit over that assertion. According to the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer, Aflac recently drew the ire of the developer by designing a new web-based promotion titled You Don't Know Quack. Jellyvision now seeks a court order to prevent Aflac from trademarking the title, as well as monetary damages. Hopefully, if the studio wins, they'll spend said damages on developing a new You Don't Know Jack, and not, you know, yachts.

However, we really don't see the similarities between the two games. One is a hilarious and entertaining series of trivia games, and one is an interactive commercial featuring that talking duck which has never, ever, ever been funny.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>aflaccopyright-infringementinsurancejellyvisionlawsuitpromotionyou-dont-know-jackyou-dont-know-quackThu, 28 Jan 2010 02:00:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/04/nintendo-shuts-down-zelda-fan-film-four-years-in-the-making/http://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/04/nintendo-shuts-down-zelda-fan-film-four-years-in-the-making/http://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/04/nintendo-shuts-down-zelda-fan-film-four-years-in-the-making/#comments
A few weeks ago, the fruits of four years of labor finally paid off for independent film studio BMB Finishes when its Zelda-based movie, The Hero of Time, was released for public consumption over the internets. Reaction to the film was mixed, but it seemed like everyone appreciated the 1,460 days of hard work that went into the feature-length film's creation. Apparently, that's not the case -- the movie's official site was updated on New Years Day, explaining that the studio had come to an agreement with Nintendo to stop distributing the film online.

The update sounds less miffed than you might imagine, stating, "we understand Nintendo's right to protect its characters and trademarks and understand how in order to keep their property unspoiled by fan's interpretation of the franchise, Nintendo needs to protect itself - even from fan-works with good intentions." The missive jokingly ends by saying, "I'm sure our next project will be right around the corner! No, it's not Majora's Mask." Yeah, that would be ridiculous. Twilight Princess, on the other hand, seems like a logical choice.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>bmb-finishescopyright-infringementfan-filmmovienintendothe-hero-of-timethe-legend-of-zeldazeldaMon, 04 Jan 2010 12:59:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2009/12/23/timegate-sues-southpeak-for-alleged-breaches-in-publishing-agree/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/12/23/timegate-sues-southpeak-for-alleged-breaches-in-publishing-agree/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/12/23/timegate-sues-southpeak-for-alleged-breaches-in-publishing-agree/#comments
Chalk up another frustrated party accusing SouthPeak of wrongdoing. The company has been sued by Section 8developer TimeGate, which alleges that the publisher has withheld royalty payments and entered into a PS3 licensing deal on the game with Russian company IC, an arrangement that TimeGate claims SouthPeak had no right to make.

In legal documents obtained by Joystiq, TimeGate also alleges that this SouthPeak T-shirt promotion was unauthorized, that the publisher had mislead TimeGate about sales figures and that the publisher has stated it should not have to adhere to TimeGate's original agreement, as it had been made with Gamecock, which SouthPeak purchased in late 2008. We've reached out to SouthPeak for comment.

If you prefer your language far more formal, the lawsuit puts it like this: "[SouthPeak] failed to provide a sufficient sales report, withheld royalty payments and did not adhere to the obligation to act in good faith and fair dealing when they established the sham transaction in order to deprive TimeGate of royalties despite the special relationship between the parties and being in a position of trust."

No specific amount is mentioned in the suit, with TimeGate asking only for "compensatory damages in an amount to be determined" following an independent audit of Section 8's sales.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>Actionbreach-of-contractcopyright-infringementgamecocklawlawsuitMicrosoftsection-8southpeakSouthpeak-InteractivetimegateTimeGate-StudiosXbox-360Wed, 23 Dec 2009 17:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/29/nintendo-investigating-possible-copyright-infringement-in-new-no/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/29/nintendo-investigating-possible-copyright-infringement-in-new-no/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/29/nintendo-investigating-possible-copyright-infringement-in-new-no/#comments
Nintendo's says it will investigate possible copyright infringement in Nokia's N900 smartphone after a Nokia blog post showcased the device playing retro games through the use of an emulator application. According to Edge, the video (which is no longer available) featured someone playing Super Mario World and Super Mario Bros. 3, and also showed off buttons that supposedly opened emulators for Nintendo's Game Boy, Game Boy Advance, NES and SNES.

Nintendo UK PR manager Robert Saunders told Edge the company was unaware of the smartphone's emulation feature and stated that Nintendo would take "rigorous steps" to protect its intellectual property. "Our legal team will examine this to determine if any infringement has taken place," Saunders added. Even if the feature ends up on the cutting room floor, we imagine some crafty hackers are already taking steps to get emulation software working on the Nokia device. Just like they do with everything else.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>businesscopyrightcopyright-infringementemulationintellectual-propertylegalnintendonokiaromsSun, 29 Nov 2009 23:30:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/16/fallout-3s-vault-boy-now-delivering-pizza-copyright-infringe/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/16/fallout-3s-vault-boy-now-delivering-pizza-copyright-infringe/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/16/fallout-3s-vault-boy-now-delivering-pizza-copyright-infringe/#comments
Ever since Fallout 3's Vault Boy went to space in Mothership Zeta, we've been at a loss for where to find the congenial gent. Alas, we never expected to see his mercurial face gracing the cover of a Massachusetts pizza shop's menu. Expresso Pizza of Billerica, Ma. put the young lad to work on the menu's cover, holding a pizza and pretending he's a waiter. We all know you're a Capital Wasteland Wanderer, silly Vault Boy!

The only question now is "How long until Bethesda shuts this down?" We contacted the Fallout publisher to find out its reaction, and were told, "Well he is a big part of our Fallout brand and is copyrighted, so, yeah, deciding on your own to use him to promote your business or product, or to sell stuff, or whatever, without getting permission from us ... not a good idea." Ruh oh!

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>badcartridgebethesdaBethesda-Game-Studiosbethesda-softworkscopyrightcopyright-infringementexpresso-pizzafalloutfallout-3massachusettspizzaredditRPGvault-boyMon, 16 Nov 2009 22:00:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/11/fortune-hunting-industry-hit-hard-by-recession-apparently/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/11/fortune-hunting-industry-hit-hard-by-recession-apparently/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/11/fortune-hunting-industry-hit-hard-by-recession-apparently/#comments
What Nathan Drake possesses in charm and acrobatic adroitness, he seriously lacks in luck. Much like that fedora-capped, state-named adventurer, he never seems to end one of his adventures with the loot he set out to obtain, leaving his cash-flow as non-existent as his reservations over killing thousands of pirates and mercenaries. Therefore, we're not surprised to see he's been branching out, and is now putting his keen analytical mind to work as a detective in Big Fish Games' Hill Stone Animation Studio's PC puzzle-solving title, The Broken Clues.

Of course, the preceding paragraph only makes sense in a world where video game characters are sentient beings, capable of performing activities outside of the scope designated for them by a hard-working team of programmers and designers. In reality, it seems that Drake's likeness was straight-up yoinked by Big Fish HSA Studio, in a brazen display of copyright infringement that's reminiscent of Limbo of the Lost, only without the added bonus of being unintentionally hilarious.Update: Corrected developer name (i.e., Hill Stone Animation Studio). Big Fish Games is the distributor. Also, check out the even more striking resemblance highlighted in a new image comparison after the break! [Thanks, 7ucky & Sayed]

Maybe you heard about the verdict that just came out in one of the music file-sharing cases: $1.9 million for 24 songs. So, what does this have to do with gaming? More than you would probably imagine, since this gets to the root of copyright and statutory damages. In fact, EFF legal scholar Fred von Lohmann posted an interesting piece on whether the penalty is even Constitutional. Whether this is the suit that breaks the back of statutory damages has yet to be seen, but it's something that any media producer or consumer should be keeping an eye on.

Of course, much of that may be getting ahead of the issue of explaining this decision in greater depth so that everyone can understand what the actual problem is. We've talked about copyright infringement and piracy at length onLGJ, and the issue here is what comes after someone is found to have infringed on a copyrighted work: damages. Specifically, we're talking about statutory damages, which something a lot of people may not be very familiar with at all.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>copyrightcopyright-infringementcopyright-lawdamageslawlaw-of-the-gamelawsuitpiracyriaaRIAA-lawsuitWed, 24 Jun 2009 23:59:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/16/microsoft-settles-paltalk-copyright-infringement-suit/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/16/microsoft-settles-paltalk-copyright-infringement-suit/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/16/microsoft-settles-paltalk-copyright-infringement-suit/#comments
While we were gearing up for an epic, The Firm-esque judicial showdown, it seems Microsoft has settled the lawsuit filed against it by PalTalk Holdings, who claimed certain components of Xbox Live infringe upon two of their patents. Neither company announced how much Microsoft forked over in the settlement -- we assume it was significantly less than the exorbitant $90 million in damages PalTalk was seeking. While we don't know the particulars of how money changed hands in the settlement, a Microsoft spokesperson confirmed it was an "amicable agreement," so it's pretty safe to assume that hugs were exchanged.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>copyright-infringementcourtlawsuitmicrosoftpaltalksettlementtrialXbox-360Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:45:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/10/paltalk-suing-microsoft-for-90-million-for-copyright-infringeme/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/10/paltalk-suing-microsoft-for-90-million-for-copyright-infringeme/http://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/10/paltalk-suing-microsoft-for-90-million-for-copyright-infringeme/#comments
Two-and-a-half years ago, online communications company PalTalk announced it would be suing Microsoft for infringing on two of its online gaming patents. PalTalk claimed that Halo's online component and the Xbox and Xbox 360 consoles themselves clearly infringe on technology relating to "controlling interactive applications over multiple computers" which was developed by MPath Interactive, then acquired by PalTalk Holdings for a sum of $200,000.

Recently, PalTalk decided to move foward with the case, and is attempting to seek $90 million in damages from Microsoft for the "tens of millions of dollars" the company lost as a result of Xbox Live's online offerings. PalTalk lawyer Max Tribble claimed Microsoft met with MPath to look at their online gaming technology, and "found the technology to be very valuable." Afterwards, they supposedly yoinked it.

Microsoft's lawyer, David Pritkin, confirmed the company met with MPath, but decided to "go in a different direction and work with a different company," which he says upset PalTalk, and could be one of the main reasons for the suit. He added that the patents aren't incredibly valuable, and that the $90 million in damages sought by PalTalk is a fairly exorbitant sum. The trial is set to take place in a U.S. District Court in Marshall, Texas, with a verdict likely to surface in the coming weeks.

Earlier last year, screenwriter William L. Crawford III sued Midway, claiming they had stolen the plot, characters and designs featured in his 2001 screenplay, titled Psi-Ops, for their 2004 action game ... titled Psi-Ops. We kinda see the similarities therein, and were fairly certain Crawford would leave the courtroom with 1.5 million of Midway's dollars in his pocket.

We were wrong. Not only about Crawford's ability to carry $1.5 million in his pants (the logistics of which are, well, impossible), but also about how the presiding judge would rule in the case -- according to Kotaku, federal Judge Florence Marie-Cooper recently decided that there was "minimal evidence supporting a reasonable possibility" that Midway had stolen any ideas from Crawford's screenplay, clearing Midway of the copyright infringement charges. That's $1.5 million that Midway no longer has to worry about paying out. Now, about that other $150 million...

If you've put countless hours into crafting a level in Media Molecule's uber-customizable platformer, you know how terrifying that headline really is -- LittleBigPlanet forums across the web are erupting with angry amateur level designers whose creations were 'moderated' (see: deleted) without explanation or forewarning. You read that right -- the levels aren't being removed from your list of published, downloadable creations. They are being deleted. Permanently. Forever. Gone.

Affected parties have noticed that the moderations have erased levels which mention (to varying degrees) copyrighted IPs. For instance, that remarkable God of War level that everyone probably played during beta? It is no more. The gaggle of Super Mario Bros. reimaginings? Yeah, those are gone too. Our personal favorite -- a level titled "Failure to Launch" was deleted, supposedly for using the title of a 2006 McConnaughey-infused romantic comedy. Sadly, our very own magnum opus also fell beneath the axe -- yes, "Maid in Manhattan" is gone, and no amount of protest will bring it back.

Moderators of the engulfed LBP forums have promised to implement a stronger feedback system to explain why levels are disappearing -- though their unwavering stance on copyrighted content has officially been displayed. Our lesson has certainly been learned -- we'll be keeping our rom-com-based creations to ourselves from now on.

Congress has recently passed the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act (the "PRO-IP Act"). While it has not been signed by the President yet, it seems as it's only a matter of time before the Act has the force of law. The PRO-IP Act does three things, generally: 1) it increases the penalties for infringement by expanding what is considered a 'work;' 2) it broadens the ability of the government to permanently seize goods; and 3) it creates an Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, a new cabinet position whose sole job is to increase intellectual property enforcement. In short, it's a load of bad news for consumers, but really, it's not that much good news for many intellectual property owners either, as I'll explain. Because this act is so broad and will be applied in so many ways, I'm actually writing two articles about it. Here on Joystiq, I will be covering the PRO-IP Act as it relates to gaming while on Law of the Game, my blog, I've (shameless plug) posted an article discussing the act as it applies to other media.

I consider myself to be in a pretty neutral position with respect to weighing the pros and cons of various IP regulations. I'm a consumer, I represent producers, and as a writer, I'm a producer myself. Being in that position, I've always admired the game industry for typically not being in favor of or enforcing the most draconian regulations to their fullest extent. In that respect, many game companies and gamers seem to understand that their relationship is symbiotic. Without one, the other would not be able to function. And with that understanding, the majority of gamers and game producers see the need for some intellectual property protection but also see the need for reasonable protection to balance the interests of the producer and consumer. And in that respect, the PRO-IP Act starts to shift the balance in ways that aren't necessarily desirable for either, but are certainly not desirable to the consumer.

This time, the big N is the one under the legal knife -- or was, since the plaintiff dropped the case a week after filing it for currently unknown reasons. Filed on June 12th and dropped on June 18th, Morgan Creek Productions felt that Nintendo's use of a song in a Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door commercial violated copyright laws, as the song was used without proper authorization.

The tune in question is "You're So Cool" by Hans Zimmer, which appeared in the film True Romance. The complaint cites that Nintendo played the commercial "sometime within the past three years," which isn't very specific. This could be one possible reason why the suit was dropped, unless the companies happened to reach a quick, under-the-table settlement.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>copyrightcopyright-infringementgamecubehans-zimmerlawsuitmorgan-creek-productionstrue-romanceyoure-so-coolWed, 25 Jun 2008 14:45:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/11/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-may-the-enforce-be-with-you/http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/11/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-may-the-enforce-be-with-you/http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/11/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-may-the-enforce-be-with-you/#commentsFiled under: FeaturesEach week Mark Methenitis contributes Law of the Game on Joystiq, a column on legal issues as they relate to video games:

Today we're going to discuss enforcement of intellectual property, which is a much deeper topic than simply "what is it going to cost me?" There are enforcement considerations on both sides of the issue, and it's often a rather sticky situation for the rights holder in a copyright scenario. Interestingly enough, there are some pretty important economic and public relations considerations with regard to enforcement as well as the legal ones.

There's a burden trademark owners face that isn't applied to copyright holders, specifically that those who don't protect trademarks lose them. Copyrights, on the other hand, aren't lost in this way. Theoretically, a copyright can only be lost once the time period for the copyright has elapsed, though recovery may soon be limited on so-called "orphan works" whose authors are difficult to locate. Alternatively, a copyright holder can formally release a work into the public domain, which is the equivalent of "abandonment" of a copyright.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>columnscopyrightcopyright-infringementenforcementintelectual-propertyjoystiqfeatureslawlaw-of-the-gameWed, 11 Jun 2008 20:00:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/04/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-much-ado-about-game-night/http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/04/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-much-ado-about-game-night/http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/04/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-much-ado-about-game-night/#commentsFiled under: FeaturesEach week Mark Methenitis contributes Law of the Game on Joystiq, a column on legal issues as they relate to video games:

Ah, the library (the place with books, not the bar). The once quiet and relaxing readers' domain has moved into the digital age, now containing computers and video games. In fact, a number of non-profits, like libraries, churches, and schools, have all found video game based events worthwhile to attract players of all ages to their establishments, or to add more entertainment to an existing event. GamePolitics actually raised an interesting question I had also received from a reader related to library and church game nights, specifically: What are the potential ramifications of holding these events from a copyright and EULA perspective?

It's actually a very good question, albeit one with a fairly nebulous answer. As was pointed out by the GamePolitics piece, there are licensing services that will acquire the proper license for the public performance of a movie. Similarly, groups like ASCAP have well established licensing procedures for music. The reasoning is that public display and performance are within the bundle of rights a copyright holder has. Therefore, in order to publicly display something, you need to have the copyright holder's permission in the form of a license. Of course, if it were this simple, I wouldn't be writing a column about it.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>columnscopyrightcopyright-infringementeulalawlaw-of-the-gamelicenselicensingWed, 04 Jun 2008 20:00:00 ESThttp://www.joystiq.com/2008/05/22/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-used-to-be-fair/http://www.joystiq.com/2008/05/22/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-used-to-be-fair/http://www.joystiq.com/2008/05/22/law-of-the-game-on-joystiq-used-to-be-fair/#commentsFiled under: FeaturesEach week Mark Methenitis contributes Law of the Game on Joystiq, a column on legal issues as they relate to video games:

Based on the comments to the last few copyright-oriented columns, it seems like everyone wants to talk about fair use. In fact, fair use is one of the most misunderstood aspects of intellectual property law, even though it's popular to play the "fair use" card in response to alleged infringement. Much of the confusion stems from the fact that there are different fair uses of copyrights and trademarks; still, other confusion stems from the fact that many of the tests for what qualifies as fair use are not terribly clear -- but I'll be clearing much of this up for you today ... hopefully.

For the most part, trademark fair use is far simpler to understand than copyright fair use, so trademarks will be our first stop. Simply put, it is fair to use a trademark nominatively or for identification. That means if you re-sell a BMW, you are allowed to refer to it as a BMW. If you're writing a book or game dialog, you are allowed to refer to brand names. You are also allowed to refer to brand names in comparative advertising too; for example: "Our console has more games than the PlayStation 3!" or "Our hardware is more powerful than the Nintendo Wii!" or "Our system is more fun than the Xbox360!" Now that I've angered all the fanboys, that's pretty much the entire universe of trademark fair use. Copyright fair use, on the other hand, is far more complicated.